A weighted-voting electoral system that performs quite well
The paper describes a weighted-voting system for the election of a Parliament. The system is easy to implement, and it dominates plurality, where "dominates" means that it performs better with reference to both representativeness and stability. The system has some other nice properties,namely (a) it offers an easy-to-read evaluation of the loss of representativeness of an electoral system; and (b) it makes it relatively easy to adopt the best system after the vote, i.e. the best system conditional to the choice of electors. Indicators for representativeness and stability are defined. Results are experimental.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1989. "Imperfect information in the product market," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 13, pages 769-847 Elsevier.
- Klein, Benjamin, 1980. "Transaction Cost Determinants of "Unfair" Contractual Arrangements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 356-62, May.
- Vannucci, Stefano, 1997. "Voting for a coalition government: A game-theoretic view," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 537-555, September.
- Ram Mudambi, 1997. "A complete information index for measuring the proportionality of electoral systems," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 101-104.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uca:ucapdv:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lucia Padovani)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.